"I have said about that what I have said about that"

Belgian federal State Secretary for Asylum Policy and Migration Theo Francken reacted today curtly to suggestions that our country might accept more than 250 (mainly Syrian) asylum seekers a day:

Ik heb daarover gezegd wat ik daarover heb gezegd.

'I have said about that what I have said about that' 

This is a clear tautology, unlike Wooster's "When we Wooster's are adamant, we are -- well, adamant". We interpret tautologies not just as trivial truisms. As they are so obviously true and hence provide nothing in terms of information that we could not already have known by ourselves, our task as listeners is to find out why they are uttered at all. In this case, it is: 'I stand by what I said' -- precisely the tautological interpretation of Wooster's utterance (which, let me repeat, I don't think was initially intended to come out as such a tautology).

Tautologies are not paradoxes but they are linked to them in a straightforward way: we only have to negate them to end up with a paradox, or definitely a contradiction (I still don't know whether I should make a distinction between paradox and contradiction):

Ik heb daarover niet gezegd wat ik daarover gezegd heb.

'I haven't said about that what I have said about that' 

This is why Wooster's utterance is not a tautology. We can negate it without the result being a paradox:

When we Woosters are adamant, we are not adamant.

With a small amount of effort, we can make sense of this as conveying the following:

'When we Woosters are adamant, it is possible for us to change our mind about being adamant'

This is not pure nonsense. You can be adamant about things and know that you'll never change your mind, but you can also be adamant about things temporarily -- say for a week or so -- and then evaluate your comportment to see whether you can relax your being adamant about them.